Online business Toolkit

Story: US Senate restarts .XXX debate

Posted by: Ezra Ingram (Monday 7 August 2006, 6:42 PM)

Ok so i know this article is a bit old however I feel that commenting on it now is as appropriate as ever. I don't know what people are thinking but it seems to me that the opossition of the conservitives and bible beaters to the formation of a dot xxx domain and the restriction of pornographic material to this domain would be something they should be all for. The sole argument i hear proposed against this by these groups is that it would provide a virtual sign post directing you to pornography. However, it is apsolutely foolish to believe that the net is not already litter with these sign posts and that a young man researching the work of one of his beloved female catholic saints might not suddenly stumble apon a nest of pornography keyworded to such a search and be inundated with porn pop ups. The fact is that if parents knew what they were doing they would be able to restrict their children to domains not ending in xxx and thus prevent any such activities from happening. And those parents who don't believe that their children are looking at porn on the internet because they see no immediate evidence of this should stop looking at their histories (since the children have probably outsmarted them their and deleted it) and start doing a little research. Anyone who believes they would be incapable of setting up security to prevent their children from entering an xxx domain is simply demonstrating either their inability to read or their unwillingness to learn and i for one would like to refrain from often stumbling accross erotic material when i don't go looking for it. I say lets strictly control porn. Lets make it so not only are porongraphic websites relegated to their own domain but every redirect or porn pop up ment to carry you off the the galaxy of porn already waiting for you on the dot coms and dot nets can no longer operate in these locations either. I say that freedom of speach isn't being impaired it's simply being moved. You wouldn't let protestors protest in your homes so why should you let porn invade your computer screens. Freedom of speech isone thing but how about the freedom to not have to listen or look at that which we may not care to see. Plus it does serve a governemental interest at this point in time. On one hand the creation of a dot xxx domain will give a small tid bit of stimulation to our current economic situation as individuals scramble to buy and sell the new dot xxx domains. On the other it would allow us to prevent our children from viewing material parents in their ever increasing prudense believe might damage them turning them into sexual deviants and in so doing might decrease things like teen pregnancy, the high occurence of STDs, and last but certainly not least it might keep our sexual offenders list from growing by leaps and bounds on an anual basis. I think that it is important to remember that the internet is a media center and we don't allow T and A on basic cable so why should we allow it on basic internet? I also find it hard to believe that those who apose this bill haven't already thought of these verythings and i think they have their own personal agendas and would like to hear the real reason they are trying to squash this bill. Could it be that money or are the religious right afraid that if we create a internet red light district they will no longer be able to point to our lax restrictions on porn as one of the cause of natural disasters. Or are they afraid that once the new domains go up their wives might do a little research and put a stop to their personal play time?